Connect with us

Asking Pawlenty A Gay Marriage Question Is “Heckling,” Ed Morrissey?



Ed Morrissey, conservative blogger at what used to be Michelle Malkin’s Hot Air, has labeled a very passionate, respectful, intelligent young man and Minnesota native, who some report as an openly-gay high school student named Gabe Aderhold, a “heckler,” because Aderhold had the audacity to raise his hand, be recognized by Republican presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty, and ask him why the former fellow Minnesota Governor does not stand up and support gay marriage.

In “Video: Pawlenty and the gay-marriage heckler,” Morrissey, reportedly a devout Roman Catholic, writes, “…one questioner berated Pawlenty for his stand on traditional marriage — which Pawlenty used as an opening to politely offer his position.”

Regular readers will know the The New Civil Rights Movement posted the impassioned video earlier today. For your benefit, here it is again.

Morrissey posted a different version, one with a few seconds more at the end. I still see absolutely nothing that qualifies as “heckling,” and, to be frank, I am offended. What do you think? Here’s Morrissey’s.

There were no slurs, no four-letter words, no booing, no hissing, no glittering — nothing more than an impassioned plea respectfully addressed to Governor Pawlenty. And Pawlenty, while he didn’t have a valid or reasonable answer to give Aderhold, certainly didn’t seem to take issue with the question or the questioner.

But Ed Morrissey sees this as “heckling.”

And let’s not even bother to mention the fact that Pawlenty didn’t give a valid answer. Let’s not bother to mention that in a hostile crowd, Aderhold actually got some applause. Morrissey doesn’t even bother to address the real issue here: why doesn’t Pawlenty, and, for that matter, all the main GOP presidential candidates, support same-sex marriage equality?

I approached Morrissey via Twitter, and asked him to retract the accusation and apologize. “Do you want to retract your ludicrous ‘heckler’ label? It was a recognized legitimate question. Apology?,” I asked.

Morrissey responded, “You mean when Pawlenty answered it, and then he kept trying to talk over Pawlenty and yelled at the stage? Er … no.”

“He was engaged in a conversation with Pawlenty. When Pawlenty ended it, so did Aderhold. There was no heckling. Shame on you,” I said.

“He got his question answered and didn’t like the answer. He wasn’t conducting a ‘conversation,’ and wasn’t owed one,” Morrissey responded, adding, “No, he didn’t. I was 10 feet away from him, and people around him were telling him to knock it off.”

Welcome to America, where conservatives (supposedly) tell a high school student who is actually interested in politics and the future — one that they have screwed up for him, thank you very much — to “knock it off,” and call him a “heckler?”

God forbid Pawlenty was asked a question on the future of social security, or NASA, or, Medicare. Would those questions be considered “heckling,” too?

This is why the right wing is scorned in America. Because they can’t even see a young man whose civil rights are being violated by the fact that — as he said — he is a second-class citizen, as are all LGBT Americans who can’t marry the person they love, but who can be fired merely for being who they are, and who, thanks to our tax system, are forced to subsidize not only those who have the right to marry and not get fired for their sexiual orientation, but are forced to subsidize the very entities who call for their downfall, namely, religious institutions..

And if you can’t even cough up a little compassion for Gabe Aderhold, whether you agree with his issue or not, you should be able to at least recognize his right to ask a question — and get a valid answer.

This isn’t what heckling looks like. This is what an impassioned attempt at survival looks like.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves Dismisses ‘Real Small, Minor Number’ of Rapes Requiring Abortions



Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R) declined to say on Sunday if he would sign a bill removing abortion exceptions for rape because they only represent a “real small, minor number” of cases.

During an interview on Fox News, host Mike Emmanuel asked Reeves if he would remove the abortion exceptions for rape in Mississippi.

Reeves sidestepped the question by insisting that the bill would never make it through the legislature.

“There’s a lot of effort, particularly in Washington and other places mainly by the Democrats, to try to talk only about the real small, minor number of exceptions that may exist,” he complained. “Over 90% of all abortions that are done in America, some 63 million babies aborted since Roe was wrongly decided in 1973, over 90% of those are elective abortions.”

Reeves argued that the “far-left” should not be talking about “all these exceptions and minor numbers.”

Watch the video below from Fox News.


Continue Reading


Trump Hinted Jan. 6 Would Be His ‘Last-Ditch’ Attempt to Overturn the Election Results: Filmmaker Alex Holder



In an interview with the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell, a British documentary maker who was filming behind-the-scenes footage in Donald Trump’s White House on Jan 6th claimed he knew something bad was about to happen before supporters of the former president stormed the Capitol and sent lawmakers fleeing for their lives.

Alex Holder, whose film crew was on hand and filming Trump and his children Don Jr, Eric and Ivanka on Jan 6th, stated there was a feeling among his people that something momentous was about to happen.

According to Lowell, “Holder was there for it all: three sit-down interviews with Trump, including one at the White House, numerous other interviews with Trump’s adult children, private conversations among top aides and advisers before the election, and around the Capitol itself as it got stormed.” adding, “The access to Trump, and listening to him and his inner circle, led him to suspect that the former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election would somehow culminate in some event at the Capitol on 6 January.”

Asked about what his feeling was prior to the riot that engulfed the Capitol building, Holder explained, “I wasn’t 100% sure, but it was sort of a feeling, so we prepared for that thing to happen. The reason we thought January 6 was because, in Trump’s mind, the last-ditch effort was to stop the process” of the vote certification by Congress.

RELATED: Man behind J6 documentary needs ‘two armed guards’ due to Trump supporters’ threats: BBC

He elaborated, “That ceremonial process that takes place in Congress on January 6, he felt, was the last time where he could, in his mind, stop the election going to the wrong person, as it were. The rhetoric that was coming out was that the election was rigged, [that] we need to fight.”

According to the Guardian report, Holder has, “testified for about four hours behind closed doors last week about his roughly 100 hours of footage, used for an upcoming documentary titled Unprecedented, and turned over to House investigators the parts demanded in a subpoena compelling his cooperation.”

Lowell added, “Holder said he additionally did a one-to-one interview with then-vice president Mike Pence, including a scene where Pence briefly reviews an email about the 25th amendment – which concerns the removal of a US president – which was privately discussed among senior White House officials in the wake of the Capitol attack.”

You can read more here.

Continue Reading


Meadows Allegedly Behind Possible Attempt at Witness Intimidation of Cassidy Hutchinson: Reports



Cassidy Hutchinson, the former aide and advisor to Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, may be the victim of attempted witness intimidation, and the person who may have attempted to intimidate her may be her former boss.

The Guardian on Friday reports “Hutchinson received at least one message tacitly warning her not to cooperate with the House January 6 select committee from an associate of former chief of staff Mark Meadows.”

That message, according to both CNN and The Guardian, was delivered at the direction of Mark Meadows, according to sources both news outlets cite.

READ MORE: Secret Service Agents Confirm Details Hutchinson Shared About Trump Demanding to Be Taken to US Capitol Jan. 6

One of the messages that the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack posted at the end of Hutchinson’s testimony read: “[A person] let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know that he’s thinking about you. He knows you’re loyal, and you’re going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition.”

According to The Guardian, “The redaction was ‘Meadows,’ the sources said.”

READ MORE: Trump Declares Hutchinson ‘Totally Discredited’ as Former Aide Says Someone in His Orbit Tried to Influence Her Testimony

CNN similarly reports: “One of [the] people who may have been trying to influence Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony did so at the behest of former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, according to multiple sources familiar with information gathered by the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection.”

Citing multiple sources CNN reports “the ‘person’ referred to in the message, which was redacted in the version projected on a screen during the hearing, was Meadows.”

Former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence Frank Figliuzzi Friday afternoon on MSNBC said there is “no question” that message constitutes “an attempt to intimidate a witness. No question about it,” he stressed.

“When you then add that to the fact that it appears that they provided, her initial attorney to her, Cassidy Hutchinson, you now have a without a doubt, predication to open a federal witness tampering investigation,” Figliuzzi added.

Thursday on Twitter Figliuzzi wrote: “This is witness tampering. Cassidy Hutchinson was the target. They picked the wrong young woman.”

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.